Influence of Titanium Dioxide Particle Size on the Photostability of the Chemical UV-Filters Butyl Methoxy Dibenzoylmethane and Octocrylene in a Microemulsion

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Influence of Titanium Dioxide Particle Size on the Photostability of the Chemical UV-Filters Butyl Methoxy Dibenzoylmethane and Octocrylene in a Microemulsion Cosmetics 2014, 1, 128-139; doi:10.3390/cosmetics1020128 OPEN ACCESS cosmetics ISSN 2079-9284 www.mdpi.com/journal/cosmetics Article Influence of Titanium Dioxide Particle Size on the Photostability of the Chemical UV-Filters Butyl Methoxy Dibenzoylmethane and Octocrylene in a Microemulsion Jutta Kockler *, Michael Oelgemöller, Sherryl Robertson and Beverley D. Glass School of Pharmacy and Molecular Sciences, James Cook University, Townsville 4811, QLD, Australia; E-Mails: [email protected] (M.O.); [email protected] (S.R.); [email protected] (B.D.G.) * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-7-4781-3440; Fax: +61-7-4781-5356. Received: 8 May 2014; in revised form: 5 June 2014 / Accepted: 5 June 2014 / Published: 11 June 2014 Abstract: Sunscreen products often contain combinations of ultraviolet (UV)-filters in order to achieve broad spectrum protection from exposure to sunlight. The inclusion of both chemical and physical UV-filters in these products, however, increases the possibility for both photolytic and photocatalytic reactions to occur. This study investigated the effect of titanium dioxide (TiO2) particle size on the photostability of the chemical UV-filters butyl methoxy dibenzoylmethane (BMDM) and octocrylene (OC) formulated in a microemulsion. The International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) Guideline Q1B for photostability testing of new active substances and medicinal products was applied. BMDM and OC in the microemulsion were irradiated with simulated sunlight in the presence of nano- (<25 nm) and micro-TiO2 (~0.6 μm) and their concentrations determined using a validated high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. For the combination of BMDM and OC, the photodegradation for BMDM was found to be 12% higher in the presence of nano-TiO2 as compared to that of the micro-TiO2. This enhanced photodegradation is attributed to the larger surface area of the nano-TiO2 and the increased generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Because of these findings, sunscreen products containing chemical UV-filters and nano-TiO2 should be regarded with caution, due to the potential loss of photoprotection. Cosmetics 2014, 1 129 Keywords: photostability; titanium dioxide; particle size; nano-TiO2; microemulsion; butyl methoxy dibenzoylmethane; octocrylene; high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) 1. Introduction Sunscreen products often contain a combination of ultraviolet (UV)-filters to achieve broad spectrum UV-protection. TiO2 is a physical filter offering protection from both UVB- (290–320 nm) and UVA I (320–340 nm)-light. Butyl methoxy dibenzoylmethane (BMDM, Figure 1) is a chemical UV-filter, protecting from UVA I- and UVA II (340–400 nm)-light, while octocrylene (OC, Figure 1) is a UVB-filter. Photostability of UV-filters is essential to ensure protection from dangerous health effects such as skin cancer or immunosuppression, caused by excessive exposure to UV-light [1]. Although TiO2 is photostable, some chemical UV-filters such as BMDM are susceptible to photodegradation on UV-irradiation [2]. Photodegradation results in a loss of UV-protection, since most photodegradants show UV-absorption at lower wavelengths than their parent compounds. These photodegradants may also cause allergic skin reactions and other toxic effects. For example, it was shown that exposure of octyl methoxycinnamate to UV-light increased the toxicity to mouse cells [3]. The photodegradants of BMDM also resulted in cytotoxic effects towards the amino acid arginine and photosensitive effects using the local lymphonode assay, a typical in vivo test for skin sensitization [4]. Sunscreen products are listed in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods and regarded as over-the-counter (OTC) drugs in the USA and as such, photostability testing as described by the International Conference on Harmonisation (ICH) Guideline Q1B [5], is not mandatory in either of these countries [6,7]. Figure 1. Chemical structures of butyl methoxy dibenzoylmethane (BMDM) and octocrylene (OC). TiO2 is a widely used in sunscreen products and often in combination with chemical UV-filters [6,7]. Two crystalline forms, anatase and rutile, are available in different particle sizes, with particles under 100 nm classified as nanoparticles, and those larger particles as microparticles. Micro-sized TiO2 appears white on the skin and is thus not very popular with consumers, while nano-sized TiO2 is nowadays more often used because of its transparency and improved aesthetic appearance [8]. However, TiO2 has the potential to compromise the photostability of chemical UV-filters in combination sunscreen products. In particular, it has been shown that TiO2 increases their photodegradation due to its photocatalytic properties and ability to generate reactive oxygen species Cosmetics 2014, 1 130 (ROS) [2,9]. These results are not surprising as TiO2 is often used as a photocatalyst in water treatment, to induce the photodegradation of organic pollutants [10]. To address this issue TiO2 used for sunscreen products is often coated, for example with silica, dimethicone or aluminium hydroxide [11–13]. Uncoated TiO2 material for the use in sunscreen products is also available on the market [14–16] and still used, which may be due to potential cost implications of using the coated material [14]. Sunscreen manufacturers are also not required to use only the coated material or even state on the label whether or not coated TiO2 was employed in the final formulation [6,7,17]. TiO2 extracted from several commercially available sunscreen products caused the photodegradation of azur B and the oxidation of α-terpinene, attributed to the generation of singlet oxygen [11] and resulted in significant cellular damage of cultured cell lines [18]. This is possibly due to the presence of uncoated TiO2 in the formulation or that the integrity of the coating may have been compromised. In Europe, sunscreen products containing nanomaterials are required to be clearly labeled with the word “nano” after the name of the ingredient [17], while in Australia and the USA this is not a requirement [6,7]. Despite this labeling requirement in Europe, the photoreactivity of different-sized TiO2 particles has thus far not been compared and therefore its effects on the stability of other ingredients in the sunscreen are unknown. The current study was therefore undertaken to examine the effect of TiO2 particle size (nano- and micro-TiO2) and coating (non- and silica coated TiO2) on the photostability of BMDM and OC. Due to lack of available photostability protocols for sunscreens, the internationally recognized ICH Guideline Q1B was followed. This is appropriate, as the complete exposure dose recommended in these guidelines (21 MJ/m2) is in the same range than the daily solar exposure in Australia in summer (20–28 MJ/m2) [19]. Previous photostability studies of UV-filters undertaken used an equivalent UVA irradiation dose of 90 [20,21] or 60 [22,23] min of sunshine on the French Riviera (Nice) in summer at noon or a full day in Scandinavia [24,25]. Equivalents of standard erythemal doses (SED) to solar radiation at midsummer noon in central Europe [26] or of minimal erythemal doses (MED) of half-day solar emission close to the equator [27] have also been reported. 2. Experimental Section 2.1. Materials UV-filters, 4-tert-butyl-4’-methoxy dibenzoylmethane (butyl methoxy dibenzoylmethane, Eusolex® 9020), 2-ethylhexyl-2-cyano-3,3-diphenylacrylate (octocrylene, Eusolex® OCR) and the silica-coated titanium dioxide (Eusolex® T-AVO; 100% rutile, particle size ~119 nm) were purchased from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). Anatase nano- (99.7% trace metals basis, particle size <25 nm) and micro-TiO2 (≥99% trace metals basis, particle size ~0.6 μm) were purchased from Sigma Aldrich (St. Louis, MI, USA). High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-grade methanol was obtained from RCI Labscan (Bankok, Thailand) and reverse osmosis water was prepared with a Millipore® Elix 10 from Millipore SAS (Molsheim, France). Xanthan gum and Mygliol® 812 (caprylic/capric triglycerides) were acquired from PCCA (Houston, TX, USA), glycerol oleate from Tokyo Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. (Tokyo, Japan) and oleth-20 (Brij® 98) from Acros Organics (Geel, Belgium). Other chemicals and solvents of reagent grade were used without further purification. Cosmetics 2014, 1 131 2.2. Methods 2.2.1. Microemulsion Preparation An oil in water (O/W) microemulsion was prepared according to a procedure described by Montenegro et al. [28], using the phase inversion temperature (PIT) method [29]. The component oil and water phases were however modified and a thickener was added to achieve an appropriate viscosity for a sunscreen product. The oil, Mygliol® 812 (10.0% w/w), glycerol oleate (4.4% w/w), oleth-20 (11.0% w/w), containing BMDM (1.0% w/w) and OC (1.5% w/w) and water phases were heated to 85–90 °C, combined and then cooled to 40 °C, after the formation of the microemulsion. Phenoxyethanol (1.0% w/w), TiO2 (2.0% w/w) and xanthan gum (0.6% w/w) were then added with constant stirring and the final weight adjusted with water to 10.0 g. The oil soluble UV-filters BMDM and OC were dissolved in the internal phase, while TiO2 was evenly dispersed in the external phase. 2.2.2. Photostability Studies Irradiations of UV-filters in the microemulsion were undertaken in a SunTest XLS+(I) solar simulator from Atlas Material Testing Technology GmbH (Linsengericht, Germany) according to the ICH Guideline Q1B [5]. The solar simulator was equipped with a xenon arc lamp (2.2 kVA) and a UV-glass-filter D65, which transmits wavelengths above 290 nm and is recognised as the internationally standard for outdoor daylight [5]. About 20 mg (accurately weighed) of the microemulsion was evenly spread onto a glass surface of 10 cm2 and maintained at <40 °C during irradiation at 400 W/m2 for 14.6 h (1.2 million lux hours), which is equivalent to 21 MJ/m2.
Recommended publications
  • Toxic Effects
    Chapter 8 Toxic effects Toxic and other adverse effects studies of tens or hundreds of patients spectrum to which the skin is exposed of sunscreens (Thune, 1984; English et al., 1987; (Gasparro et al., 1998). Since UVB is the In order for a sunscreen to have a toxic Lenique et al., 1992; Szczurko et al., primary stimulus for adaptation of the effect on living tissues, it must penetrate 1994; Trevisi et al., 1994; Gonçalo et al., skin to sunlight, less adaptation might be the skin. There is some evidence that 1995; Ang et al., 1998) and reviews expected to develop in individuals who this can occur (see p. 63 et seq.). (Dromgoole & Maibach, 1990; Gonzalez use sunscreens regularly. The adaptive & Gonzalez, 1996; Schauder & Ippen, responses include thickening of the epi- Human studies 1997). In the past, PABA and its esters dermis and transfer of melanin-contain- No published studies of toxic effects in were the most commonly reported ing granules to keratinocytes (tanning) humans were available to the Working contact and photoallergens in sun- (Fig. 44), which reduces the trans- Group. screens (Funk et ai., 1997), and this find- parency of the skin to UVA and UVB ing contributed to a reduction in their use (Fusaro et al., 1966; Olson et al., 1973). Contact sensitivity in sunscreens. The contact or photocon- Several reports showed that UVR- There are numerous reports of cases of tact allergen in sunscreens most induced injury, such as dermal connec- allergic reactions and photoreactivity to frequently cited today is benzophenone- tive tissue damage and sunburn cell for- sunscreens, but the prevalence of this 3, followed by dibenzoyl methanes.
    [Show full text]
  • New Technology Provides Cosmetically Elegant Photoprotection Zoe Diana Draelos, MD; Christian Oresajo; Margarita Yatskayer; Angelike Galdi; Isabelle Hansenne
    COSMETIC CONSULTATION New Technology Provides Cosmetically Elegant Photoprotection Zoe Diana Draelos, MD; Christian Oresajo; Margarita Yatskayer; Angelike Galdi; Isabelle Hansenne he primary preventable cause of photoaging is United States, as there is no official rating system for exposure to UVA radiation. This wavelength UVA photoprotection yet. T emitted by the sun is present year round in all Ecamsule absorbs UVA radiation in the range of 320 to latitudes. Currently, the majority of sun-protective prod- 360 nm, but its peak absorbance occurs at 345 nm. It is ucts provide excellent UVB protection with minimal UVA typically combined with other organic sunscreen ingredi- protection. Although UVB protection is important in ents, such as avobenzone and octocrylene. Avobenzone, order to prevent sun damage to the skin from occurring, which is a photounstable photoprotectant, becomes UVA protection is equally important. New developments photostable when combined with octocrylene. These in raw material science have led to the manufacture of ingredients yield a photostable broad-spectrum sunscreen novel ingredients able to provide unprecedented photo- combination. However, the active sunscreen agents are protection COSin the UVA spectrum. DERMonly part of the formulation. Also important in sunscreen One of the most significant developments in cutaneous is the construction of the vehicle to deliver the photo- UVA protection was the discovery of ecamsule (Figure 1), protectants in an aesthetically pleasing manner, enticing also known as Mexoryl SX. Mexoryl SX, which has patients to wear the product. Sunscreens fail to be effec- the International Nomenclature of Cosmetic Ingredients tive if they remain in the bottle. name of terephthalylidene dicamphor sulfonic acid, is In order to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of a water soluble.
    [Show full text]
  • FDA Proposes Sunscreen Regulation Changes February 2019
    FDA Proposes Sunscreen Regulation Changes February 2019 The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates sunscreens to ensure they meet safety and eectiveness standards. To improve the quality, safety, and eectiveness of sunscreens, FDA issued a proposed rule that describes updated proposed requirements for sunscreens. Given the recognized public health benets of sunscreen use, Americans should continue to use broad spectrum sunscreen with SPF 15 or higher with other sun protective measures as this important rulemaking eort moves forward. Highlights of FDA’s Proposals Sunscreen active ingredient safety and eectiveness Two ingredients (zinc oxide and titanium dioxide) are proposed to be safe and eective for sunscreen use and two (aminobenzoic acid (PABA) and trolamine salicylate) are 1 proposed as not safe and eective for sunscreen use. FDA proposes that it needs more safety information for the remaining 12 sunscreen ingredients (cinoxate, dioxybenzone, ensulizole, homosalate, meradimate, octinoxate, octisalate, octocrylene, padimate O, sulisobenzone, oxybenzone, avobenzone). New proposed sun protection factor Sunscreen dosage forms (SPF) and broad spectrum Sunscreen sprays, oils, lotions, creams, gels, butters, pastes, ointments, and sticks are requirements 2 proposed as safe and eective. FDA 3 • Raise the maximum proposed labeled SPF proposes that it needs more data for from SPF 50+ to SPF 60+ sunscreen powders. • Require any sunscreen SPF 15 or higher to be broad spectrum • Require for all broad spectrum products SPF 15 and above, as SPF increases, broad spectrum protection increases New proposed label requirements • Include alphabetical listing of active ingredients on the front panel • Require sunscreens with SPF below 15 to include “See Skin Cancer/Skin Aging alert” on the front panel 4 • Require font and placement changes to ensure SPF, broad spectrum, and water resistance statements stand out Sunscreen-insect repellent combination 5 products proposed not safe and eective www.fda.gov.
    [Show full text]
  • Annex VI, Last Update: 02/08/2021
    File creation date: 03/10/2021 Annex VI, Last update: 22/09/2021 LIST OF UV FILTERS ALLOWED IN COSMETIC PRODUCTS Substance identification Conditions Wording of Reference Maximum conditions of Product Type, concentration Update date number Chemical name / INN / XAN Name of Common Ingredients Glossary CAS Number EC Number Other use and body parts in ready for use warnings preparation 2 N,N,N-Trimethyl-4-(2-oxoborn-3-ylidenemethyl CAMPHOR BENZALKONIUM 52793-97-2 258-190-8 6% 15/10/2010 ) anilinium methyl sulphate METHOSULFATE 3 Benzoic acid, 2-hydroxy-, HOMOSALATE 118-56-9 204-260-8 10% 02/08/2021 3,3,5-trimethylcyclohexyl ester / Homosalate 4 2-Hydroxy-4-methoxybenzophenone / BENZOPHENONE-3 131-57-7 205-031-5 6% Reg (EU) Not more than Contains 02/08/2021 Oxybenzone 2017/238 of 10 0,5 % to protect Benzophenone-3 February 2017- product (1) date of formulation application from September 2017 6 2-Phenylbenzimidazole-5-sulphonic acid and its PHENYLBENZIMIDAZOLE SULFONIC 27503-81-7 248-502-0 8%(as acid) 08/03/2011 potassium, sodium and triethanolamine salts / ACID Ensulizole 7 3,3'-(1,4-Phenylenedimethylene) bis TEREPHTHALYLIDENE DICAMPHOR 92761-26-7 / 410-960-6 / - 10%(as acid) 26/10/2010 (7,7-dimethyl-2-oxobicyclo-[2.2.1] SULFONIC ACID 90457-82-2 hept-1-ylmethanesulfonic acid) and its salts / Ecamsule 8 1-(4-tert-Butylphenyl)-3-(4-methoxyphenyl) BUTYL 70356-09-1 274-581-6 5% 15/10/2010 propane-1,3-dione / Avobenzone METHOXYDIBENZOYLMETHANE 9 alpha-(2-Oxoborn-3-ylidene)toluene-4-sulphoni BENZYLIDENE CAMPHOR SULFONIC 56039-58-8 - 6%(as acid)
    [Show full text]
  • Should a Toxicological Risk Assessment of Ubiquitous Chemicals Be Done Using Data from Only One Source of Exposure?
    Mini Review Open Acc J of Toxicol Volume 4 Issue 2 - January 2020 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Di Nardo JC DOI: 10.19080/OAJT.2020.04.555633 Should a Toxicological Risk Assessment of Ubiquitous Chemicals Be Done Using Data from Only One Source of Exposure? Di Nardo JC1* and CA Downs2 1Retired Toxicologist, Vesuvius, USA 2Executive Director, Haereticus Environmental Laboratory, Clifford, USA Submission: January 09, 2020; Published: January 23, 2020 *Corresponding author: Di Nardo JC, Retired Toxicologist, Vesuvius, USA Keywords: Toxicological; Chemicals; Dioxybenzone; Octocrylene; Oxybenzone; Sulisobenzone Introduction consumers to believe that there is no further risk associated with the After much discussion and petitioning by several individuals, chemical. non-governmental organizations and scientists alike, the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) re-opened the sunscreen drug monograph Data on February 26, 2019 to review the safety of sunscreen actives In October of 2018 the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) banned considered Generally Recognized as Safe and Effective (GRASE) the chemical benzophenone from use in foods and/or in plastic food since 1978 [1]. After their review, the FDA concluded that the public wraps [3], because it was found to cause cancer in rodents according to a study conducted by the National Institute of Environmental safety of a dozen drug actives currently in use (several of which record “does not” currently contain sufficient data to support the Health Sciences in May 2007 [3]. In June 2012 the state of California are benzophenone based chemicals - avobenzone, dioxybenzone, added benzophenone to their Proposition 65 list recognizing it as octocrylene, oxybenzone and sulisobenzone) and, therefore, are a carcinogen and came to an agreement that a sunscreen product requesting industry to provide additional data (mainly toxicokinetics, should not contain any more that 50 parts per million [4].
    [Show full text]
  • EWG Petitions CDC to Conduct Biomonitoring Studies for Common Sunscreen Chemicals
    EWG Petitions CDC To Conduct Biomonitoring Studies for Common Sunscreen Chemicals May 22, 2019 To: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Environmental Health Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry 4770 Buford Hwy, NE Atlanta, GA 30341 Patrick Breysse, Ph.D., CIH Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit research and advocacy organization with headquarters in Washington, D.C., is petitioning the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to add common sunscreen chemicals to the CDC’s Biomonitoring Program. EWG has been doing research on sunscreen ingredients since 2007, helping to educate the public about the importance of using sunscreens for health protection, as well as providing information about health risks that may be associated with certain ingredients used in sunscreen products. In response to a significant increase in the use of sunscreens in the United States and the associated increased potential for systemic exposure to the ingredients in these products, in February 2019, the Food and Drug Administration proposed a new rule for sunscreen products.1 The proposed rule would require sunscreen active ingredients to be assessed for their propensity to absorb through the skin and overall safety. Recently, the FDA completed tests on the absorbance of four common sunscreen active ingredients: avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule. As reported in a study published by the Journal of American Medical Association in May 2019,2 application of all four tested sunscreen ingredients resulted in plasma concentrations that exceeded the 0.5 ng/mL threshold proposed by the FDA for waiving systemic carcinogenicity studies as well as developmental and reproductive toxicity studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Sun Protection & Sun Screens | Four Seasons Dermatology
    FOUR SEASONS DERMATOLOGY 354 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR. • SUITE 300 • COLCHESTER, VT 05446-5988 • PHONE 802-864-0192 • FAX 802-860-4919 SUN PROTECTION AND SUNSCREENS Repeated and prolonged exposure to sunlight increases the risk of developing skin cancer and is the major cause of wrinkled, spotty, "old" -appearing skin. It's important to have a healthy and active lifestyle and we encourage this. Some common sense guidelines to keep your skin and eyes safe: • Avoid the hot mid-day sun. Try to schedule your outdoor activities for early morning or early evening. • Make clothing a regular part of protection: o Keep your shirt on o Wear a wide brimmed hat instead of a baseball cap o Wear long sleeves - "rash-guard" or "water'' shirts made from quick drying, breathable material may be most comfortable in hot weather. o "Golf sleeves" can protect your arms and keep you cool in the sun. They can be found in sporting good stores or online. • Be especially careful when on the water, snow or sand as sunlight is reflected upwards from these surfaces. • Don't forget the sunglasses - excess sun exposure causes cataracts. • Encourage your children to practice good sun protection. Early sun damage increases the risk of skin cancer. • Wear a sunscreen that contains specific UVA-blocking ingredients {see below) and an SPF of at least 30. If you are getting sunburns or very tan, you need to 1) use a higher SPF, 2) apply more thickly or reapply more frequently {ideally every 2 hours or more), and/or 3) use a product with better UVA protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Sun Protection
    DRUG NEWS Recommending the Best Sun Protection Clinical Pearls: o Recommend a “broad-spectrum” sunscreen – one that covers UVB, UVA1, and UVA2. o Recommend SPF 30-50 o Advise on non-pharmacological sun protection methods o Emphasize proper sunscreen application technique o Emphasize skin protection when taking drugs known to cause photosensitivity. Familiarize yourself with known implicated drugs by referring to appendix 2. Background 1-4 The sun emits 3 types of ultraviolet (UV) radiation: UVC (100-290 nm), UVB (290-320 nm), and UVA (320 -400 nm). UVA rays can be further divided into the shorter UVA2 rays and the longer UVA1 rays. UVC rays, the shortest rays, are completely absorbed by the ozone layer, whereas UVB rays penetrate the epidermis and UVA rays, the longest rays, penetrate into the dermis. The main consequence of UVB irradiation is sunburn, but can also include immunosuppression and skin cancer. Consequences of UVA radiation include: phototoxicity (i.e. involvement in drug-induced sun sensitivity reactions), photo-aging, immunosuppression, and skin cancer. What is SPF? 2,5,6,7 It is easy to be misled by Sun Protection Factors (SPF). SPF is assessed through a standardized test by finding the ratio of the minimal dose of solar radiation that produces perceptible erythema (i.e., minimal erythema dose) on sunscreen-protected skin compared with unprotected skin. Sunburn is caused primarily by UVB rays (and shorter UVA2 rays), and thus SPF indicates mostly UVB protection. However, UVA protection is equally important since it is responsible for photo-aging and cancer. Therefore, it is important to look for the phrase “broad spectrum” when choosing a sunscreen as broad spectrum indicates both UVB and UVA protection.
    [Show full text]
  • Avobenzone, Homosalate, Octinoxate, Octocrylene
    MACROANTIOXIDANT SUN PROTECTION- avobenzone, homosalate, octinoxate, octocrylene, oxybenzone cream Natura Bisse International SA Disclaimer: Most OTC drugs are not reviewed and approved by FDA, however they may be marketed if they comply with applicable regulations and policies. FDA has not evaluated whether this product complies. ---------- Active Ingredients Purpose Avobenzone 3% .................................................... Sunscreen Homosalate 10% ................................................... Sunscreen Octinoxate 7.5% .................................................... Sunscreen Octocrylene 10% ................................................... Sunscreen Oxybenzone 3% .................................................... Sunscreen Uses helps prevent sunburn Keep out of reach of children. If swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center right away. Natura Bissé Barcelona C+C Oil-Free MacroAntioxidant Sun Protection Broad Spectrum SPF 30 Net Wet 1 oz 30 ml Directions apply liberally 15 minutes before sun exposure use a water resistant sunscreen if swimming or sweating reapply at least every 2 hours children under 6 months: ask a doctor Sun Protection Measures. Spending time in the sun increases your risk of skin cancer and early skin aging. To decrease this risk, regularly use a sunscreen with a Broad Spectrum SPF value of 15 or higher and other sun protection measures including: limit time in the sun, especially from 10 a.m. - 2p.m. wear long-sleeved shirts, pants, hats, and sun-glasses. Warnings For external
    [Show full text]
  • Sunscreen: the Burning Facts
    United States Air and Radiation EPA 430-F-06-013 Environmental Protection (6205J) September 2006 1EPA Agency Sun The Burning Facts Although the sun is necessary for life, too much sun exposure can lead to adverse health effects, including skin cancer. More than 1 million people in the United States are diagnosed with skin cancer each year, making it the most common form of cancer in the country, but screen: it is largely preventable through a broad sun protection program. It is estimated that 90 percent of non- melanoma skin cancers and 65 percent of melanoma skin cancers are associated with exposure to ultraviolet 1 (UV) radiation from the sun. By themselves, sunscreens might not be effective in pro­ tecting you from the most dangerous forms of skin can- cer. However, sunscreen use is an important part of your sun protection program. Used properly, certain sun­ screens help protect human skin from some of the sun’s damaging UV radiation. But according to recent surveys, most people are confused about the proper use and 2 effectiveness of sunscreens. The purpose of this fact sheet is to educate you about sunscreens and other important sun protection measures so that you can pro­ tect yourself from the sun’s damaging rays. 2Recycled/Recyclable—Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper How Does UV Radiation Affect My Skin? What Are the Risks? UVradiation, a known carcinogen, can have a number of harmful effects on the skin. The two types of UV radiation that can affect the skin—UVA and UVB—have both been linked to skin cancer and a weakening of the immune system.
    [Show full text]
  • UVA Chemical Filters
    UVA Chemical Filters: A Systematic Study Jacqueline F. Cawthray, B. Science (Hons) A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The University of Adelaide Department of Chemistry February 2009 Chapter 1 1 Introduction Sunlight, incorporating ultraviolet radiation, provides the energy necessary to sustain life. Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) is the non-visible part of the solar spectrum incorporating the wavelengths between 100 and 400 nm. Wavelengths in the ultraviolet region of the spectrum are further subdivided into UVA, UVB and UVC. The physiological responses to UVR can be both beneficial and harmful. Small doses of UV are required to produce vitamin D and in some cases therapeutic improvements are observed for skin disorders. However, long and short-term exposure can cause a variety of detrimental biological effects in humans. The biological effects of UVB have been intensively researched and are largely well understood. Armed with this knowledge, public attitudes have changed accordingly. The bronzed Aussie is no longer the national icon he or she once was, as the use of sun protection methods, including sunscreens, has now become common practice. Until recently, UVA was believed to play little or no role in the damaging effects of UVR and was often neglected in studies. However, there is now accumulating evidence that UVA plays a major role in sunlight-induced damage. As information regarding the detrimental effects of UVA increases, there needs to be an accompanying increase in public awareness regarding the potential hazards and the need for sunscreen filters that protect skin from UVA wavelengths has become a current issue of importance.
    [Show full text]
  • Photoprotection: a Public Awareness
    Internet Journal of Medical Update, Vol 3, No. 1, Jan-Jun 2008 Letter to editor Photoprotection: a public awareness Dr. (Ms.) Meera Sridhar MD, DVD, DDV Consultant Dermatologist, Dubai, United Arab Emirates Sir, earth on a particular day and is a recognized part of the weather report in many countries. Excessive solar ultraviolet radiation exposure of the skin has been associated with several FACTORS AFFECTING THE AMOUNT skin disorders/diseases including premature OF ULTRAVIOLET RADIATIONS aging of the skin and skin cancers. Avoiding REACHING THE EARTH’S SURFACE exposure to sun is the best method but AT A PARTICULAR TIME AND PLACE impractical. Public is informed through UV ARE DEPENDENT ON: Index of the amount of harmful ultraviolet rays 1. Time of the day: Two third of the total reaching the earth and choosing of the right UVR reaches the earth between 10 am and SPF (Sun Protection Factor) is the practical 2 pm of which 10 % is UVB and 90 % and effective approach for photoprotection. UVA. Increasing pollution levels (release of 2. Surface reflection: chlorofluoro carbon compounds) into the Snow and ice reflect 80 % of UVR atmosphere over the last 20 years has resulted Sand reflects 20 % of UVR in gradual depletion of the ozone layer which Most ground surfaces reflect < 10 % in turn has resulted in greater amounts of UV of UVR radiations of the sun reaching the earth’s Water reduces penetration of UVR by surface as also global warming. The sun rays 50 % have been broadly classified into 3 groups 3. Seasonal: Maximum radiation occurs based on the wavelength of the electro during summer and minimal in winter.
    [Show full text]